Archive for Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Pope: Other Christians not true churches

July 11, 2007

Advertisement

— Pope Benedict XVI reasserted the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches and Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.

The statement brought swift criticism from Protestant leaders. "It makes us question whether we are indeed praying together for Christian unity," said the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, a fellowship of 75 million Protestants in more than 100 countries.

It was the second time in a week that Benedict has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-1965 meetings that modernized the church. On Saturday, Benedict revived the old Latin Mass.

Comments

janeyb 8 years, 1 month ago

I hate people who quote the Bible like it is the final word on everything. Matthew was written like 50 years after Jesus death, and Mark, Luke and John were even later. Each book tends to exaggerate and make Jesus more wonderful than the previous one. He didn't rise up from death to walk the earth and then float up to heaven. They have his burial box in storage in Israel, but can't announce it, because they totally depend on the "Jesus" tourism to survive. Mary had sex --probably with Joseph--and had a baby. She had several children, and the whole clan traveled around with Jesus--his apostles were relatives! John the Baptist (Jesus cousin) and Jesus were descendents of King David and thought it was worth a shot to try to unite the Jews and get out from under the control of the Romans. Good intentions, but hardly the mystical, magical stuff of the Bible.

HabitualSinner 8 years, 1 month ago

Oh man, this is friggin great...I love poking fun at Catholics...And now the Pope has given me the fodder I so desperately wanted. Thanks Benny....

Centrist 8 years, 1 month ago

Out of touch, and irrelevant. There are much more pressing issues than a tit-for-tat over who gets to be the "real" church.

Gimme a break.

Linda Endicott 8 years, 1 month ago

This is really no different than what every other church says.

But appallingly arrogant.

jonas 8 years, 1 month ago

Well, good. Now American protestants can know how it feels when they tell everyone else that they are going to hell for not being a Christian at all.

jonas 8 years, 1 month ago

Let me rephrase that: "they will not be gaining salvation by not being a Christian at all."

Kam_Fong_as_Chin_Ho 8 years, 1 month ago

Let me see if I got this straight: The pope is saying that the true church is the one that has gambling/bingo on church grounds, priests who molest kids and a pope who worked with Hitler during WWII?

Jesus chased money changers out of the temple, but chain smoking gamblers with lucky trolls get a pass.

Okay. Got it.

imastinker 8 years, 1 month ago

Kam Fong, that was completely out of line.

As a catholic, this seems like a stupid thing for the Pope to say. Who really cares? Of course, I believe that being catholic is the best way to get to heaven, but so do the baptists, protestants, and islamic suicide bombers for that matter. If I didn't think that I'd find another religion.

Oracle_of_Rhode 8 years, 1 month ago

Let's all pray for this misguided Hate Pope.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

Humans just can't get along...not even Christians can get along with each other.

hawklet21 8 years, 1 month ago

Kam Fong was not out of line, because nothing that he said wasn't true.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

Don't forget, Kam Fong, that Catholics are also promoting the evils of birth control in AIDS infested Africa.

Sorry, imastinker, but you might want to find a new religion or just ditch superstitions in general.

Oracle_of_Rhode 8 years, 1 month ago

Catholics often worship steamed-up windows, grilled cheese sandwiches, tree bark, wall stains and anything else that abstractly resembles a human face that could be construed to look like Mary or Jesus.

Catholic clergy have an insanely high proportion of child molesters in their midst, whom they protect and abet.

Now, the Pope, who once was in the Hitler Youth, who wears Prada, says if you ain't a Catholic you're gonna burn in hell.

I'm convinced! Catholics are number one! Let's begin the inquisition.

(Actually, I prefer a hybrid of Buddhism and trying to follow the words of Jesus).

Kathy Getto 8 years, 1 month ago

Kam_Fong_as_Chin_Ho (Anonymous) says:

Let me see if I got this straight: The pope is saying that the true church is the one that has gambling/bingo on church grounds, priests who molest kids and a pope who worked with Hitler during WWII?

Jesus chased money changers out of the temple, but chain smoking gamblers with lucky trolls get a pass.

Okay. Got it.


You weren't out of line, Kam_Fong, you just forgot to add destroys entire cultures and murders innocent people in the name of THE CHURCH!

acg 8 years, 1 month ago

If I ever decide to "find religion" in my life I'm definitely going for Catholisicm. What a racket, eh? You get to do whatever you want to do all week long and as long as you tell the shriveled old guy in the box on Sunday, you're good to go. He makes you say a few hail mary's and light the candle and that's that. Plus, you know the old guy in the box loves it. He gets to hear all of the dirty details. It's like every confession is an open letter to Penthouse Forum. Yep, that's quite a racket. I'm sure, btw, if there is a God, that he's not bothered by all of this in the least.

craigers 8 years, 1 month ago

Unfortunately acg, that is the same depiction I have of Catholisicm. However, in every church there are abusers of God's grace. The Pope is definitely not uniting anybody, that's for sure.

Bradley Menze 8 years, 1 month ago

Growing up Catholic I knew it had a very dogmatic perception of salvation but spiritually it did not meet my needs. In my late teens, I had an experience which transcended the spiritual, as it was physical and emotional in nature, too. I perceived this to be my "salvation experience" and soon found myself drawn to evangelical type of churches which were non-denominational in nature. Since then and relative to other denominations and Catholicism I was aware of what separated us but tended to focus on what we had in common. While wondering or even suspecting that such a view was likely in the Catholic heirarchy, I was disappointed to read this reassertion by the Pope.

micah6_8 8 years, 1 month ago

From the Vatican Website (Q&A): "Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church" with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?"

"Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense[20]."

One of the great joys of being a pastor in my "middle ages" has been the joy of witnessing the gradual narrowing of the gulf between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. In my youth, I was disturbed when denominational differences set up social and religious barriers between RC's and Protestants, especially when my parents informed me that as a Protestant, I could never marry my 5 yr old "girlfriend" (I was the same age) who was Catholic.

In the years that passed, I felt so relieved that many of the gaps closed and I could share my faith and love for Christ not only with those of my denomination, but with other believers in the church universal, regardless of denomination. Broadening talks between Roman Catholicism and my own denomination have been encouraging and I, for one, felt doors opening, instead of remainng closed.

Now the new Pope seems to be slamming those doors closed, denying true communion between other disciples of Jesus Christ, declaring as illegitimate those outside of Roman Catholicism, denying the "whosoever" in John 3:16, as well as Romans 10:9 and scores of other scriptures that seem to regard legitimacy as a condition of faith, not denominational affiliation.

This is such a setback! I feel dirtied and diminished as a professing Christian, and as a pastor, as a result of the Pope's biased statements. I also feel diminished in that my sense of communion with believers in the Roman Catholic Church is similarly clouded and pushed away.

Apparently the Abrahamic Covenant, whose eventuality lies in the person of Christ, was only meant to be a blessing in all nations for those who believe in the Pope.

This is a shame!

trinity 8 years, 1 month ago

statements such as this are exactly the why of me not being a catholic any more. bleh.

hi hawklet! :)

Ralph Reed 8 years, 1 month ago

Here's another opinion from cnn http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/07/10/pope.churches.reut/index.html?iref=newssearch

Just so we have both ends of the spectrum.

I've not yet read the 16-page document from the Church so I can't compare either 75x55's link to fox or this one to cnn with the base document. However, both the fox and cnn online articles read like a series of soundbites and aren't really substantive. But, I do agree with 75x55 -- the article in the LJW is poorly done.

feeble 8 years, 1 month ago

I'm convinced! Catholics are number one! Let's begin the inquisition.

Oh, the irony. The current Pope used to be Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which at one time was called the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

It's interesting to note that Benedict was party to the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, or Vatican II, so this seems to be a case of sour grapes.

Tychoman 8 years, 1 month ago

b3, God forbid that a Catholic church be feel-good and incorporate love.

I have a former roommate who is [sadly] Catholic and gets vehemently offended if someone calls Catholicism a Christian religion. Yeah, they're the religion of acceptance.

TheYetiSpeaks 8 years, 1 month ago

Kam Fong was right! If anything, he was to lenient. People should not forget that during the Middle Ages the Vatican was one of the most powerful entities in the world and used their power very suspectly, even invading other territories with their vaunted army. Here's some interesting trivia: Around the 10-1100's, three popes in a row died while having sex...of course none of them were married....and not all of their partners were girls...tata.

Confrontation 8 years, 1 month ago

"Of course, I believe that being catholic is the best way to get to heaven, but so do the baptists, protestants, and islamic suicide bombers for that matter. If I didn't think that I'd find another religion."

I love how you lump all the Muslims together as suicide bombers. You just couldn't bring yourself to say "Muslims," could you? You're just as ignorant as this Pope and those who worship him as God's right-hand man.

TheHeartlessBureaucrat 8 years, 1 month ago

Well...if there is a list of rules getting into the afterlife, I'll bet those policies are not changed or modified by the whims of humans. So...either we were already saved or already screwed.

So, if we use the "exclusivity mode of afterlife inclusion" and there's a doorperson with a velvet rope letting certain folks into the "Salvation Club" hotspot, they're probably not going to let the folks in line make decisions about admission.

Sorry, I'm going to wait for the one in charge to make that decision.

THB

sourpuss 8 years, 1 month ago

The Catholic Church did not form until the 4th century, a good 300 years after the Jesus rigamarole. It certainly was not the first church. The Catholic and Eastern churches were basically one church until the 11th century, though they always disagreed on the "filoque" issue and that popped up during the early church councils of the 4th and 5th centuries.

The Coptics in Egypt are the closest to the early church left, but many were wiped out in the 9th and 10th centuries under a despot.

Remember kids, God speaks Latin! Or was that Greek? Or Hebrew... ah well.

grimpeur 8 years, 1 month ago

From the headline:

"...true churches..."

Heh. Good one. Kinda like "reality television."

Kam_Fong_as_Chin_Ho 8 years, 1 month ago

The inferiority complexes of those who have chosen false religions is running rampant on these forums.

...it also seems to be running rampant in the Vatican!

jonas 8 years, 1 month ago

You seem awfully certain about all of that. It's almost the same to my ears (eyes) as the people claiming that the Bible is the final word on everything. If you hate it when they do it, then why do you do it?

BigDog 8 years, 1 month ago

Confrontation

"Of course, I believe that being catholic is the best way to get to heaven, but so do the baptists, protestants, and islamic suicide bombers for that matter. If I didn't think that I'd find another religion."

I love how you lump all the Muslims together as suicide bombers.


Call me crazy but aren't all Catholics being lumped together in most comments here.

Ralph Reed 8 years, 1 month ago

Ah, nothing like religion (or politics, or abortion, or bicycles, or sexual preference, or cohabitation, or [fill in your own word]) to bring out a well reasoned and intellectual discussion of the subject. Ya gotta lovit.

davidnta 8 years, 1 month ago

Maybe you need to realize that there are priest that molest little girls as well.

jonas 8 years, 1 month ago

I'm sure there are people in most professions willing to molest little girls. I'm sure that in all of them those people are the severe minority, thankfully.

gogoplata 8 years, 1 month ago

He must not be a big fan of the reformation.

daddax98 8 years, 1 month ago

bigdog you are crazy. but regardless of that the pope is THE leader of the RCC and TRUE cathloics are comanded to take every thing he says as if God himself said it to them, something about infalability of the pope or something. So the leader of this faith has drawn the lines and most are just pointing that out.

daddax98 8 years, 1 month ago

BTW I think this whole mess i somehow the result of the actions of Wal-mart, or Clinton (Bill not George) and li'l Bush

Confrontation 8 years, 1 month ago

BigDog: Yes, but only as having superiority complexes, not as murderers.

gogoplata 8 years, 1 month ago

(Actually, I prefer a hybrid of Buddhism and trying to follow the words of Jesus).

Are these the words of Jesus you are trying to follow?

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

TheHeartlessBureaucrat 8 years, 1 month ago

Daddax98: Yeah.....look at em....none of 'em are catholic. Walmart, Clinton and Bush...the new Axis of Evil.

WWBD? What Would Bootsy Do?

THB

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

Okay you all. Simmer down. 100 words are NOT going to convey exactly what the Pope said. Since you are all in an uproar, get it from the source directly. http://www.zenit.org/rssenglish-20098

While Benedict isn't quite as "media savvy" as his predacessor, he knows his doctrine. What he states if fact. All Christian Churches have branched from the Roman Catholic Church. That's historical fact.

Oh...btw... ":upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of hell will not overpower it." Matthew 16:18

Fire away.

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

Daddax98, "the pope is THE leader of the RCC and TRUE cathloics are comanded to take every thing he says as if God himself said it to them, something about infalability of the pope or something."

Only when the pope speaks "ex cathedra" is it considered infallible. If the pope said we should all eat Froot Loops for breakfast, no Catholic would be obliged to eat them. It is only in matters of faith and morals that he would ever speak infallibly, like the Resurrection must be believed or you should not consider yourself Catholic.

rosben 8 years, 1 month ago

daddax98 (Anonymous) said

...the pope is THE leader of the RCC and TRUE cathloics are comanded to take every thing he says as if God himself said it to them, something about infalability of the pope or something. So the leader of this faith has drawn the lines and most are just pointing that out.

Actually, to be more correct, popes speak infallibly extremely rarely. Within the last hundred or so years, a pope has only spoken infallibly (dogmatic definition) a handful of times. Pope Benedict has never spoken dogmatically.

I find it quite sad to see how much hatred and ignorance there is towards the Catholic church on this forum.

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

b3...St. John's is anything but a feel good love fest. St. John's folks are very action oriented and actually practice what they preach. Sorry if you had a bad experience there. I've had a bad experience across town..despite that, I'm still Roman Catholic, 100%.

Ragingbear 8 years, 1 month ago

I'm Pastafarian. My heaven has a beer volcano and a stripper factory.

May all behold His Noodly Appendage!

Ramen.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

"I find it quite sad to see how much hatred and ignorance there is towards the Catholic church on this forum."

I'm sorry, rasben, but some of us kind of get offended when somebody tells me I'm going to a place like helll just because I don't believe what they do.

"Hatred and ignorance" can easily be applied to your church as well.

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill, The pope did not say anyone who is not Catholic is going to Hell. The Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth. Rather than that being a cause for arrogance (and I do realize there are plenty of people who do wrongly do so), it is a grave responsibility for a Catholic to act more like Christ than anyone else. The Church only claims itself to be the ordinary means of salvation. There are other ways, such as by fire, or desire, that one can gain heaven.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

cath, I wasn't specifically talking about the Pope...just christians/catholics in general.

Rasben said that there is a lot of "hatred and ignorance" when it comes to the Catholic church and I pointed out that I don't appreciate anyone telling me that, b/c I don't believe in their superstitions, I'm going to be sent to a fiery pit and burn for all eternity.

Sorry if that comes off as "hatred" or "ignorant" but I get a little offended to their rational...I don't tell anyone that they're going to be tortured if they don't believe what I believe in.

BTW, I have no clue what your talking about in your description of the Church and the fullness of Truth...it sounds like nonsense to me but to each their own.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

"Yup - the gospel is offensive to many, R_R."

Yup, to the few of us who prefer logic and reasoning in our view of the universe.

Tychoman 8 years, 1 month ago

b3, the service shouldn't be enjoyable?

Spoken like a true Catholic.

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

b3...If you are referring to Mass as Church, then perhaps you were improperly educated (as I was) and you have the wrong intention of the holy Mass. It's not about education, it's about being present to God, through Christ in Word and the sacrifice of the altar...Eucharist. I sincerely apologize for the style and personality of what you have encountered. I believe that is what the Pope is trying to correct in his allowing the Latin Mass back. To come back to what is central in the Mass...Word and Body. I agree, sometimes the music style steals the attention of those present. I beg your patience.

independent 8 years, 1 month ago

The only way to heaven and eternal life is a narrow path. There is no universal religion or general belief in a god somewhere that will lead to eternal life though many churches want you to believe this. It is much easier for the world to believe that as long as we are "spiritual" we are ok, BUT, the only way to heaven is......... HEAVEN IS A FREE GIFT---ROMANS 6:23 KJV IT'S NOT EARNED OR DESERVED---EPHESIANS 2:8-9 KJV MAN IS A SINNER---ROMANS 3:23 KJV MAN CANNOT SAVE HIMSELF---EPHESIANS 2:8-9 KJV GOD IS MERCIFUL AND DOES NOT WANT TO PUNISH US----1 JOHN 4:8B KJV GOD IS JUST AND MUST PUNISH SIN----EXODUS 34:7B KJV CHRIST IS THE INFINITE GOD-MAN----JOHN 1:1,14; 20:28 KJV HE DIED ON THE CROSS AND ROSE FROM THE DEAD TO PAY THE PENALTY FOR OUR SINS AND TO PURCHASE A PLACE IN HEAVEN FOR US---ISAIAH 56:6 KJV HAVE FAITH AND TRUST IN JESUS CHRIST ALONE FOR ETERNAL LIFE--ACTS 16:31 KJV

An ecuminical religion is VERY DANGEROUS as is Catholicism. There is only one way to everlasting life and that is through the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
Never put faith in a catholic priest to forgive your sins, HE CANNOT. INFANT baptism is not found in the Bible. Also, muslims, islam, allah are in direct opposition with the Bible and the teachings of Christ no matter what some websites claim.

http://www.bible-truth.org/fundbapt.htm#001

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

"An ecuminical religion is very dangerous as is Catholicism. There is only one way to everlasting life and that is through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. Never put faith in a catholic priest to forgive your sins, he cannot. infant baptism is not found in the Bible. Also, muslims, islam, allah are in direct opposition with the Bible and the teachings of Christ no matter what some websites claim."

Yawn...thanks for the nonsense though.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

"they're just passing along the warning"

Um, that's the same thing as telling me that if I don't believe what they do, then I'm going to burn for eternity. How do you not see that?

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

Independent...funny how you quote from the Bible that the Catholic Church has given you. How can you paraphrase scripture verses, out of context to get where you are at? Help me here!

The Catholic Church can and does trace it's roots right to Jesus Christ alone. And sola scriptura doesn't work either. Jesus is always revealing Himself through the tradition of the Church. This is why the Catholic Church holds the depth of the Truth that we can't begin to assemble in this piddle of a forum.

paladin 8 years, 1 month ago

Clem: Damnation! That thar pope says I'ma goin ta hell, then thats good nough fer me. He oughta know. I'ma guessin he's kinda like the counslurge a god. Takes care a all a god's bidness here on earth. Kinda like a CEO a the whole shebang. Too durn old ta be a dang catholic now. Ain't much point to er. Thanks pope! That thar put ma mind ta ease a might. Mights well live er up from here on out. Quit hoggin that thar jug Zeek an pass er round.

Zeek: Heeyuck! Heeyuck! Pope er not, heres to ya.

EXks 8 years, 1 month ago

How long did it take the citizens of Europe to cast off the yoke of catholic oppression, perhaps 500 years or so?....and now Latin America, the last bastion of catholicism is FLEEING this institution in droves, converting to various evangelical doctrines. Perhaps this is why pB XVI is mouthing off.

micah6_8 8 years, 1 month ago

77x55 asks the difference between the RCC and the church catholic. That is a great question to ask for it has large implications for both RCCs and other Christians.

From a Protestant POV: The Church catholic (catholic is another word for 'universal') is that body of believers who believe in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matthew 16:16), have accepted Him as Lord and Savior (Romans 10:9-10), and who have embodied His ways (John 15:14, et al). This is regardless of denomination.

The Roman Catholic Church is specifically that body of believers by the same name. It is one of many Christian denominations

From a RCC POV: It would be correct, especially based on the current Pope's latest disaster with words, to equate the RCC with the church catholic, for as far as they are NOW concerned, all other churches are illegitimate, and therefore cannot be considered part of the Church catholic (or universal), OR the RCC.

Does anyone find it interesting that the head of the first Church in Jerusalem was not Peter, but in fact, James? See Acts 12:7 & Acts 15:4-22 You will notice that this original church was the church the apostles reported to, discussed their policies and doctrines at, and from which the earliest church decisions were made from. As you read the chapter 15 passage, do you notice that it was in fact James who "made the decision"? Did you notice that it was to that church and to James that Peter was reporting to in chapter 12?

Who was it whom God appoointed to be the head of the Church in Ephesians chapter 1? Was it a mere mortal?

I could go on..............

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill...The Church never has said "if you don't believe in what we do, you are going to burn in hell." The Church is NOT here to judge. Now, those you've encountered might say this but knowing the depth of the Church, we owe it to ourselves to seek the truth beyond what we experience. Muslims believe in peace, but our current experience by a few, wouldn't tell you that. Does that mean that I think Muslims are going to hell? Absolutely not? If they've never learned who Christ is, they can't be held accountable.

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill, if it is all superstition why would you care if anyone said you were going to hell? I would never judge another human being like that. It is not my place. And, as a Catholic we hear that we are the ones headed to hell all the time, and it has never really offended me. And as far as the fullness of Truth, that means God has revealed Himself through the Church. It doesn't offend me if you do not believe that and I hold no ill will toward anyone who does not have the same beliefs as I do.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

absolutelyridiculous wrote: "The Church is NOT here to judge."

No, but those who belong to the Church do plenty judging. And that's another thing that irks me...people saying they don't judge and that they're just passing long information or warnings.

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

b3 that is not true. anyone who seeks the truth although ignorant of the Gospel or the Church can be saved

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

Cath, you don't get offended b/c you're taught that if you do what the Church tells you, you'll be okay and avoid hell. I get offended b/c, first of all, it insults my intelligence and two, b/c it's rude and disrespectful.

EXks 8 years, 1 month ago

The Church never has said "if you don't believe in what we do, you are going to burn in hell."

-------------------- ahhh, maybe yes and maybe not....BUT.....

Let's put this statement in historical context ....."if you don't believe in what we (the catholic church) do, you are going to be KILLED"

1.The Crusades 2. The Inquisition 3. Mass extermination of indigenous peoples 4. Killing Jews for NOT converting during the Middle Ages. 5. Silencing Galileo

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill, I am not offended because I really do not care what someone who thinks they know something about my Faith does or says. Do you really not think Catholics are not insulted and their intelligence questioned all the time? How could it insult your intelligence and not mine also? If anyone tells another they are going to hell I would guess it should always be considered rude and disrespectful. Unless maybe if you are a satanist and want to go there. But there I go speaking of a religion I know nothing about.

paladin 8 years, 1 month ago

Clem: Well now. I'as way on out thar ta hell n back in Belvue on a plumin job tother day an I had ta stop on offin the road at St. Mary's. Don't know why, itas jest a power a pullin on ma pantleg. That feller in the main buildin where I'as drawn toerd up n told me that he's the real pope an I'as probly awright n not agoin ta hell. Long as I had a pure heart n onliest did good stuf whilst I was here about. Well now, I does ma best. Anawho, ifin they's two fool popes, I figur y'all kin b'lieve either one, so take yer pick. Don't matter none ta me. Its yurin bidness.

Zeek: Shet ep an gimme that jug. Heeyuck!

Flap Doodle 8 years, 1 month ago

"...a pope who worked with Hitler during WWII?" Worked with Hitler in that he lived in the same country with Adolph & served in the army. Joseph Alois Ratzinger joined the Hitler Youth (as required by law) when he was 14. When he was 16, he was drafted into the German Army.

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill wrote: "No, but those who belong to the Church do plenty judging. And that's another thing that irks me:people saying they don't judge and that they're just passing long information or warnings."

You are correct:a great opportunity to practice what Christ himself taught us....forgiveness. For those whose sins you bind they are bound, those that your forgive, they are forgiven. Please forgive us.

Roadkill_Rob 8 years, 1 month ago

":a pope who worked with Hitler during WWII?"

I think he was referring to the Pope of the WWII era, Pope Pius XII...the theory is that he was in cahoots with Hitler but I don't have evidence of this.

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill...I started a pretty serious Christian journey here about 7 years ago after being an unconscious Roman Catholic since birth. I can tell you, that my intelligence has more than once been challenged in the past 7 years. I'm finding the more truth that is revealed to me, the less I know...there is a difference.

There are 2 realities... To be in and of the world. To be in the world but not of the world.

Blessings to you and good night!

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

Do people realize that until recently Pope Pius XII was regarded as a hero for hiding jews during WWII?

-After the pope's death in 1958, Golda Meir, later prime minister of Israel, stated, "When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the pope was raised for the victims."

-"after World War II, the chief rabbi of Rome, Dr. Israel Zolli, converted to Catholicism, taking the baptismal name of Eugenio, after Eugenio Pacelli - Pope Pius XII."

-"In appreciation of what Plus did for the Jews; the World Jewish Congress made a large cash gift to the Vatican in 1945; in the same year, Rabbi Herzog of Jerusalem sent a "special blessing" to the Pope "for his lifesaving efforts on behalf of the Jews during the Nazi occupation of Italy"; and when Plus died in 1958, Israel's Foreign Minister Golda Meir gave a him moving eulogy at the United Nations for the same reason;"

The reason he did not publicly do more was because of the Nazi response. Edith Stein was a nun, a jewish convert, hiding in Holland when the bishops of that country decided to speak out at every Mass condemning the Nazi's. The Nazi response was to round anyone of jewish heritage up and kill them. To speak out only cost more lives and so he chose to hide as many jewish people as he could

paladin 8 years, 1 month ago

Clem: Seems ta me they all a bunch a hipnocrits. Na matter what reeligion they claim.

Zeek: Waaall drink ta that. Heeyuck! Aaauughaack!

paladin 8 years, 1 month ago

Clem: Zeek, I hereby fergive ya fer bein a A-hole.

Zeek: Why, thanks. Hick!

EXks 8 years, 1 month ago

Who says these sorts of things now? Radical Islamists - 'convert or die'.

75 x 55


Excellent point and so noted!

gr 8 years, 1 month ago

I smell a RATzinger. No wonder he changed his name.

But, keep in mind, he is human and makes mistakes like the rest of us. Bush has made speeches that he probably shouldn't and this guy may have been overly excited and said wrong things, too. I guess one should look for a pattern.

"and TRUE cathloics are comanded to take every thing he says as if God himself said it to them, " And if the pope speaks dogmatically and says, kill the infidel, all his followers will obey?

A: What is a Muslim?

" Oh:btw: ":upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of hell will not overpower it." Matthew 16:18 " I didn't know Peter was around 300 years after Jesus.

"The pope did not say anyone who is not Catholic is going to Hell." And the opposite of "only true path to salvation" is .....?

"There are other ways, such as by fire, or desire, that one can gain heaven." What! Fire....blow yourself up...hmmmm.

paladin 8 years, 1 month ago

Clem: My momma use ta said we all got ar salvation from the blood a the lamb, whatever in tarnation that ment. Not from no popes er nobedy elset. She'as a good person. Don't think she went ta hell. No sir, not fer a minute. An grammer, too, though folks tryin ta be a castin expursions her way a lately. Think she made it in, too.

Zeek: Yesir, momma didn't need to high falutin, fancy church. Jest the one down the road. That'n suited her jest fine. Me, too. Don't need ta go thru Rome ta be a good person er a good Christian fer that matter. That's mostly politics a talkin. Ta git more money ta git more gold and jewels. Ifin ya do, that thar hell better be a big size place cause it'll be plum full. Most the folks I know an lots I don't. Naaah.

Tom McCune 8 years, 1 month ago

It's been a few hundred years since we had multiple Popes. Maybe that's the answer? Pope shopping!

paladin 8 years, 1 month ago

Clem: What in blue blazes he means ba that?

Zeek: Search me, don't makes no sense. Might be possessed. Like in them movies. Heeyuck!

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

right thinker, I would be happy to use a confessional after Bill Clinton, or anyone for that matter. Catholics believe Confession is a sacrament and it washes away our sins. Why would it matter who was ahead of me in line? The sick are the ones in need of healing. And I cannot imagine being in line for that healing and think I have the right to judge the state of anothers soul. And, even though I am not a fan of Bill Clinton (or George Bush, just so no one gets that impression), I truly hope that he will be in heaven some day.

EXks 8 years, 1 month ago

Marion, we agree to disagree on many issues, but that last post of yours was classic, and I have to give you credit....you gave me a good laugh.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

7.5 X 55,

I appreciate your charity above and always have.

sourpuss (Anonymous) says:

"The Catholic Church did not form until the 4th century, a good 300 years after the Jesus rigamarole. It certainly was not the first church."

+A cursory reading of patristic literature from the 1st and 2nd centuries might prevent you from making statements you will never be able to support under close examination.

Roadkill_Rob (Anonymous) says:

"Yup - the gospel is offensive to many, R_R."

"Yup, to the few of us who prefer logic and reasoning in our view of the universe."

+Has science explained or proven anything beyond mere plausibility of the purely naturalistic origins of the universe and how energy and matter spontaneously self-generated? I hadn't heard that one. In any case, if you believe such, then you, my friend, are a member of a "faith" community.

independent (Anonymous) says:

"An ecuminical religion is very dangerous as is Catholicism."

+Please explain this statement.

"There is only one way to everlasting life and that is through the shed blood of Jesus Christ."

+I agree.

"Never put faith in a catholic priest to forgive your sins, he cannot.

+Please see John 20:22-23 where Christ breathes on His Apostle granting them the authority to forgive sins or retain them, not to mention Matthew 18:18 when He granted them the authority to bind and loose on earth/heaven. Is it your contention that that authority died with the Apostles. If so, it defies logic for a Church given the promise of perpetuity. This is the reason Apostolic succession becomes an issue. Couple this with James 5:16 (auricular confession of sins) and you can see where Catholics are merely following the dictates of what Scripture tells us to do.

"infant baptism is not found in the Bible."

+Nowhere in the Bible does it say something must be in the Bible to be binding. But the Bible does say listen to the Church in Matthew 18:17 and that the Church (not the Bible) "is the pillar and foundation of truth." (1 Tim 3:15). The real question for you dear friend is which one, or is it your contention that there are "many truths" like the secular progressives would wish us to believe?

Take care and God bless.

Crossfire 8 years, 1 month ago

Maybe "W" will want to Liberate The Vatican next. We do need to free the nuns from their oppressive dress codes. ...and stop those Priestverts from terrorizing the little boys.

absolutelyridiculous 8 years, 1 month ago

I find it quite interesting that those here with the least knowledge about the Roman Catholic Church are so quick to judge the Church as null and void or even evil. Knowledge of the Church, it's teaching and tradition that comes from CNN and Fox News is shallow but obviously helps sell. Now who is the "lost sheep"? I suppose if you belong to the Church of Headline News, then you can say whatever you want.

The Roman Catholic Church is always willing to share what has been revealed in scripture, tradition and the person of Jesus Christ still present to you all today through the Roman Catholic Church. It's the one free thing still left in this world.

I'm outta here before I loose it and upset your "temple"

gr 8 years, 1 month ago

"But the Bible does say listen to the Church in Matthew 18:17 and that the Church (not the Bible) "is the pillar and foundation of truth." (1 Tim 3:15)."

Help me a little here. The "Bible" says to listen to the "church" rather than the "Bible"? So, should we listen to that advice? This sounds a little like: I'm lying to you.

In 1 Timothy, Paul says he is writing them instructions with inference that Timothy will know and therefore instruct those in God's household (that is, the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth).

Paul instructs Timothy to instruct the church. If the last phrase modifies the church, then the pillar and foundation of the truth needs to be instructed from one man through another man. But, if it modifies "the living God", that makes more sense. However, a church following God's advice, could be the pillar and foundation of truth. How does it come to that truth? By searching the scriptures.

ksdivakat 8 years, 1 month ago

Jayneb-I would like to know where you found your facts from? Or is this just an opinion from you? Heres the thing, both christians and catholics have been around for 2000+ years and counting, it is human nature to find the truth, some diligently seek it and others take it as it comes, but if one sets out to find it, you will f ind it no matter what, you may not like the outcome, but nevertheless, yuo found the truth, so there must be something to christianity and catholicism, otherwise it wouldnt have survived for all these years. Personally I am a christian and i choose to believe the bible, but just like any other "group" of people, christianity has hypocracy to it, in fact, i think "christians" can be the worst of the worst when it comes to being hypocritical, but, I choose to believe its true, and i would never offend anyone by telling them that christianity is the only way, it is the only way for me! The christian church is lacking in so many areas that there isnt enough room on this forum to discuss them all, but the point to all this is that we are human, and as any humans we make mistakes and big ones, and i am ashamed of alot of mine, but i live in a country where i can express my opinions and not be persecuted.....yet! I would never tell you that it was my way or the highway, because I cannot choose for you, but I can tell you this, Jesus came to people out of love and first and fore most that should be the agenda of both the catholic church and the christian church. God Bless all today!!

Crossfire 8 years, 1 month ago

Anybody in town got a millstone... I think the mighty Kaw will substitute for the sea.

Crossfire 8 years, 1 month ago

...somebody say "Leave them kids alone."

Crossfire 8 years, 1 month ago

One of the coolest scripture readings of all time.

jonas 8 years, 1 month ago

So, errr, Lepanto, how do you REALLY feel about all of this?
Don't hold back any punches or fish heads!

Tychoman 8 years, 1 month ago

Marion might I also recommend "Smut" by Lehrer. It's hilarious.

Dreaming of Peter Pan! The Wizard of Oz? There's a dirty old man!

janeyb 8 years, 1 month ago

Start with "The Jesus Dynasty" by Dr. James Tabor. He is the Chair of Religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Then read his sources and the responses of various other religious scholars. Very interesting reading.

And for those who quote Paul/Saul. He was a Roman/Turk/Jew who never met Jesus. Did Jesus come to him after his death and save him, or did the movement Jesus and John the Baptizer start scare the Romans enough that they sent Paul in (he spoke Aramaic) to control and lead the situation? And if the Romans sent Paul in as a man who claimed to have seen Jesus after his death, how did that spoil everything for John and the other brothers of Jesus who were left to lead the movement? After all, they knew Jesus was dead and had not arisen.

I'm not saying that there isn't a God, or that Jesus didn't exist. I'm not saying there isn't some historical truth in the Bible. New discoveries along with going back and looking at the documents that the Bible was adopted from--what was left out and what was included but changed by translation--is making it hard for those who have dedicated their lives to the study of religon to not separate truth from fantasy.

thusspokezarathustra 8 years, 1 month ago

Ksdivikat "but if one sets out to find it, you will f ind it no matter what, you may not like the outcome, but nevertheless, yuo found the truth, so there must be something to christianity and catholicism,"

Yes, I think all "truth" should be decided by what people believe & for how long, how intelligent. Perhaps if I can convince enough people to disbelieve in gravity for a long enough time then we'll be able to fly.

Yep, no other religions or cultures ever survived for 1000's of years until Christianity came along so it must be true why else would it have survived for so long.

Now if 2.1 billion christians could just convince the 1.1 billion agnostics/atheists, 1.3 billion muslims, 900 million hindus, 376 million buddhists that they've found the truth, they could then commence to bickering over which Christian religion is the "true" religion.

compmd 8 years, 1 month ago

So Mr. Pope is now against the entirety of orthodox Christianity? Quite interesting.

Frederic Gutknecht IV 8 years, 1 month ago

I guess I'm happy that there are people out there who believe in something. It seems weird but must be nice. I've known no human who I believe can understand the "secrets" of our existence or know some road to eternal life. I've been spoken to by no gods. I've seen none. If I had, I'd imagine that I wouldn't believe it to be anything but a halucination. I just can't see how I can get from my lot of eternal damnation to eternal life. It would make little sense if I did, as I can't see how I am much different from most other animals on this planet. I can't even imagine what I would DO with eternal life, except to spend it learning more about the life that I can experience (see, hear, feel, etcetera) and trying to create a better/cooler/niftier world for this life. Is life a struggle to become god or a road to enjoying struggle?

And here we have people arguing about the validity of the words of a "religious" leader. It seems so ridiculous. All human organizations are rife with corrupt and ignorant humans! How are we ever to trust that something great will bloom from such an ever growing mountain of crap? How do we trust words that fall from such stinking societal stains? Why do we perpetuate and promote them? I was raised "Catholic" and that was rather meaningless. I met few priests or nuns that I felt deserved unreserved respect. I read little verse that held meaning for me. It seemed that, at best, religions were married to humanity and; therefore, the bastard children of "god(s)". Homo sapians sho ids, ain't they?~) I sometimes wish that the open practice of god fearing religions would be outlawed. Let's make rules for THIS world. One golden rule is probably enough to keep some semblance of peace and harmony. People just aren't much good, yet we seem to perpetuate the weak, rude and ridiculous nature of our clan. We can't weed. We can't feed. We only need. Got greed? Beautiful. I'm sure that the politics of our respective false gods will save us all, eternally...from what we deserve.

james bush 8 years, 1 month ago

The Pope: is it he who said," I'm a uniter, not a divider"? He's about as effective as Bush in a leadership role!

james bush 8 years, 1 month ago

What the world needs now is a good Baptist spokesman to step forward! Can't someone get Jimmy Carter to say something brilliant about now?! Where is the atheist spokesman? Sitting back and watching christians denigrate each other?!

Bassetlover 8 years, 1 month ago

As a life-long Catholic, I know I speak for many other in my religion who are dumbfounded by this decree, not to mention horribly embarrassed. For the majority of us, it does not come close to what we actually believe and feel, especially in this day and age. The boys at the Vatican are due for an extreme makeover and reality check.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 1 month ago

All I have to say is..... bbbbwaaaahhaaaahhhaaaaahhaaaaaaaahhaaaaaa. LOL. ROFLMAO. etc.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 1 month ago

And one more thing... This illustrates nicely that conflict and division are at the root of religion. Conflict and division, often resulting in violence against the "other", are the raisons d'etre of religion.

purplesage 8 years, 1 month ago

I can't imagine being in a confessional after Bill Clinton. He claims to be a Baptist; no priest there.

Micah - You are largely alone in raising the actual context of the Pope's assertions. I am glad someone has. The question of apostolic succession is the crux of the matter. The Roman Catholic's claim is that Peter was the first vicar of Rome. This is supported by tradition, which of course is a viable source of authority in RC thinking. However, real, historical evidence is not that solid. That Peter was crucified upside down at Rome may be the real story, but evidence is not that strong, or so I understand.

The Baptists, through Carroll's "Trail of Blood" claim ties to the Apostles. The Orthodox similarly claim antiquity. There is a well-promoted group, headquartered in Utah, running current ads claiming that truth disappeared from the earth resulting in "thousands of year's of confusion" but (through Joseph Smith) is now restored.

A church history prof referred tot he RC Church as a "medieval ecclesiastical institution". I thought it a bit harsh at first, but believe it is accurate. That is the historical incubator of the movement and it was the dominant institution during the age of Christendom. Pope Benedict would role back progress made in recent years. I prefer to thing, that differences notwithstanding, Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus are correct in the concept of "Evangelicals and Catholics Together."

Crossfire 8 years, 1 month ago

Popes and Supreme Court appointees have the same problem when the get the job they are just too old and set in their ways to change anything, and by the time they leave they are just drolling down their chins an filling their diapers.

janeyb 8 years, 1 month ago

75x55. Saul was a man struck blind by an executed, risen from the dead, ascended to heaven Jesus. Jesus then sends Ananias (?) to pray with Saul and heal his blindness. This is easier to believe than that the Romans needed someone who could control the Jesus/John the Baptizer movement. Saul, who didn't belleve in the movement, was Roman/Turkish and Jewish---plus he could read and write Aramaic, was sent. He didn't teach the philosophy of Jesus. He set rules for worship, sex, circimcision etc. Jesus wasn't worried about this sh*t--the Roman's were. You go with hocus-pocus and I'll go with power and politics. Spread your reading beyond that Puritan evangelical "fire and brimstone in hell" crap from the 1700's you keep referring to.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

purplesage (Anonymous) says:

"A church history prof referred tot he RC Church as a 'medieval ecclesiastical institution'."

Your history prof ought to have studied source documents a bit more prior to making an ass of himself. My bet is he's bored and lazy, opting for the marxist sound bite and glorious approval of the teachers lounge. It never ceases to amaze me how history "profs" still get away with doing so little history in favor fashionable, yet easily dispatched drive-bys of religion in general and Catholicism in particular. It really never ceases to amaze me how many students buy it, because it "feels right" and never lift a finger to discover the truth.

Of course their students are in no position to question such nonsense being spoon fed for 12 years a dumb-downed view of the past through the muddle headed pooh of public education firmly under the watchful eye of the National History Standards, and readily drink the kool-aid, thus producing teachers who don't know in what war the battle of bunker hill was fought.

For a brief perusal of source documentation of the middle ages one ought to begin browsing:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook.html

Pass that one off to your "prof." Good thing he never had to tackle Christopher Dawson on his medieval institution theory. Harry Crocker and Dr Thomas Woods would eat him for lunch. His views sound trendy, but they're ignorance in action. A cursory survey of Patristic literature would prevent him from looking stupid, but then again he'll never be challenged by a class full of mall kids, ticking the time to the bell and their next beer or bong hit.

"Pope Benedict would role back progress made in recent years."

How so? Honesty of what one believes used to be a virtue. The first step in ecumenism, as the Pope has said, is not feel good cuddly talk that accomplishes nothing in reality, but open and honest discussion about what separates one from another. Now, to modernism, he's "divisive" or some other idiot term used to excuse one from actually having to engage in converstion and debate.

"I prefer to thing, that differences notwithstanding, Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus are correct in the concept of "Evangelicals and Catholics Together."

I agree with you and, having read this Pope in depth, so does Benedict XVI.

Kodiac 8 years, 1 month ago

"On June 1, 2005 Colson appeared in the national news commenting on the revelation that W. Mark Felt was Deep Throat. Colson expressed disapproval in Felt's role in the Watergate scandal and suggested that if Felt could not remain loyal to President Nixon, then he should have simply resigned."

7.5x55,

(re: "ignorance" - ': the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness')

storm 8 years, 1 month ago

The pope's statement isn't new thinking. Protesting the main church is par for the course when you're a protestant. I mean that's how they got their name. Duh.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

purplesage,

The only way it is striking me is as a sound bite, with numerous connotations; some valid, some ridiculous and uncomprehensive.

I still don't understand. What's his point? What does he specifically mean by the Catholic Church being "medieval ecclesiastical institution?"

This could mean many things, some which can be immediately discerned as true, others which are speculative, and still others that drive a "whig" view of western civilization and are patently false and easily dispatched.

Let us assume that the middle ages began in 476 AD.

gr 8 years, 1 month ago

"After all, they knew Jesus was dead and had not arisen."

Interesting that "they" were willing to be stoned, sawed in two, put to death by the sword... all for a hoax. And the Romans let all the people believe it rather than produce the body and stop the nonsense!

camper 8 years, 1 month ago

I'm Catholic and not really ashamed. Most of us of go to church and really don't listen to what the priest or pope might say. It kinda goes in one ear and out the other, The services are really a place of solace where one can reflect in a more private way. Solace is the key word. We really don't care what the pope say's.

Tom McCune 8 years, 1 month ago

Camper:

Thanks for that honest response. I have quite a few RC friends who are similar. But my question is this: "Why do you remain a Roman Catholic?" There are other churches (regardless of what the Pope thinks of them) that don't require quite that same level of hypocrisy. On one hand I kind of admire Catholics for their refreshing de-facto tolerance of hypocrisy. But on the other hand, I just wonder why it is necessary. Why not switch to another church that provides the same solace without officially demanding a bunch of stuff that many of the members unofficially ignore?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Well Camper with your stated view of "most" Catholics, it is little wonder that vocations have collapsed; Mass attendance is about 75% of what it was prior to V II; Catholic education is barely distinguishable from the unscholastic, mind-numbing valuelessness sort of their Public counterparts putting themselves on par with daycare; Catechesis is nearly non-existent and the Catechism barely read leading to many embarassing faux pas by "Catholics" stating positions that, in fact, aren't Catholic, but they don't have the sense (or dignity) to just go down the road to the closest Episcopal Church were they would truly find a like-minded crowd; liturgists, stuck squarely and embarassingly in the 70's (complete with felt banners and hoedown, toe tapping, Joan Baez folk guitars), innovating with the Mass thinking it some sort of improv opportunity to entertain; and Catholics believing their Church a dogmatic democracy that should just bend to the whims of shifting tides of fashion and "get with the times."

I am truly sorry that the laity today expects so little and sets such low standards for their prelates. They get what they demand and deserve: a bland, lamentable "service," with squishy little sermons designed to not be "divisive," held in Churches that look like the inside of refrigerators. "Most" Catholics have so little knowledge of the treasure they have inherited and take it such for granted that I have no doubt believing your statment at all.

I don't disagree with a thing you've said, I am just pleased to not be counted among your number.

purplesage 8 years, 1 month ago

Check out the comments on Dr. Albert Mohler's blog relating to the Pope's comments. It can be found at this address:

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog.php

Religious belief is held because the one who holds it regards it as true. That does not mean that all religious beliefs are true; some are not. Historical Christianity is rooted in the events recorded in the New Testament. At one level, the Christian faith is true (or not true) based on the reliability of these accounts. At another level, they are true because God has spoken. Whether one accepts that or not does not alter its truthfulness.

Dr.Mohler makes an excellent point. The Pope, in making these assertions, though Dr. Mohler does not agree with them, is expressing concern for souls. That evangelistic concern is what compelled the Apostles to risk their lives, no, give their lives for the Gospel. It is the most natural thing in the world, that one, being convinced of the truthfulness of their faith would desire to share that with others. To overlook that simply misunderstands the nature of faith. The desire to share truth does not demand acceptance nor should it be done in a method that causes others to regard it as being "crammed down the throat." However, I fear that some would regard merely broaching the subject as "cramming."

cath 8 years, 1 month ago

camper, how sad. I really do not understand why you would even go to church if you dont care what your Faith teaches. What about the Eucharist? How can you find solace in a place you don't really care about what they beleive, if it goes in one ear and out the other?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Hey, Anti-Secularman,

Do you happen to have a few trendy scriptural interpretations for sale or a forged declaration from Luther on aged parchment to throw out a few more books of the Bible that I'm finding inconvenient to my newfound theology. I was really hoping to go out and start my own Cash-Cow, err...I mean...Church? :)

purplesage 8 years, 1 month ago

I see that the good doctor's words struck you as they did me at first hearing, Lepanto. But consider this. Medieval relates to time. It is the "when" of the Roman Catholic Church. Ecclesiastical is a form of Church government (as are presbytery or congregation). So it relates to government by bishops - with the Roman bishop asserting primacy. (Easy to do when the bishopric you occupy is in the city from which the world had been ruled for hundreds of years.) Institution - that which has developed around and gives form to the church and through which it is still known today.

So, I do not believe he made a donkey of himself. And I know he wasn't lazy or bored. His was an ever-active mind dedicated to scholarship.

Crossfire 8 years, 1 month ago

Pope Benedict XVI aka Joseph Alois Ratzinger aka Joey Ratz Grand Inquisitor, Prefect of The Holy Office of the Inquisition in 1981. ...membership in the the Hitler Youth in 1941. Ratzinger suffered a hemorrhagic stroke. In August 1992, while vacationing in the Alps, he fell and struck his head against a radiator. Anybody surprised at anything this old Headknocker says?

purplesage 8 years, 1 month ago

Lepanto - I guess it really is a sound bite - from a lecture. My take, after listening to the context, is that the entity we know today as the Roman Catholic Church developed during the middle ages. Of course, that flies in the face of the claim to have started with Peter, a fact that is shrouded in the veil of history.

Following the legalization of Christianity as a religion by Constantine in the Edict of Milan, 313 A.D.. This allowed, among other things, the formalization of the Canon of New Testament Scriputre. And, it allowed the ultimate formation of the Roman Catholic Church with the Bishop of Rome at its head.

So, sometime following your date of 476, as things took shape, the Roman Catholic Church a an institution, which endures still today, took shape.

I think his intent is two fold: one, to discern the institutionalization of the Church (into its several forms) from the spiritual nature of the Church as defined in the New Testament; and two, to identify the origin and history of the Roman institution itself. I do not think any more than that was intended.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Purplesage:

"Following the legalization of Christianity as a religion by Constantine in the Edict of Milan, 313 A.D.. This allowed, among other things, the formalization of the Canon of New Testament Scriputre. And, it allowed the ultimate formation of the Roman Catholic Church with the Bishop of Rome at its head.

So, sometime following your date of 476, as things took shape, the Roman Catholic Church a an institution, which endures still today, took shape."

I don't necessarily disagree, however there is a substantial body of documented evidence (beginning in fragment form in 70s-80s AD-later quoted by Eusebius in the fourth century who had full access to it-with complete doucments showing up around 96AD with Clement of Rome and only gains momentum from there) that proves beyond any reasonable doubt the formation of that hierarchy that so many seem averse to, complete with bishops and Eucharistic liturgy (Ignatius in Antioch - 107AD, Polycarp in Smyrna (c 70 - 155 AD), and Irenaeus in Lyons (c 180 AD) that disprove the theory of a burst of institutionalization.

Now did the Church become more institutionalized as the middle ages emerged and Roman influence waned? Absolutely. The Church was merely continuing the precedent of build-up it had already established for itself while still "underground."

Ireneaus (in about 180 AD) gives us the first full account of the succession of the bishops of Rome (10 successors by his time); and one must ask why he was concerned with the Bishops of Rome, being a Bishop of Lyons, not to mention why as Bishop of Lyons he deferred to Rome and sought Her guidance.

Clement in his epistle (96AD) is writing to the Corinthians admonishing them and reminding them to act in accord to what they were taught by the Apostle Paul. Why is the Bishop of Rome writing to a community well outside the jurisdiction of Rome if there were not already a precedent established of the exercise of authority outside this "diocese?"

Reading Eusebius, who was Bishop of Caesarea from 313 -339, was already writing a "History of the Church." He had access to documents that are long lost, but does quote from them and given us an even deeper glimpse in the the first three centuries of Christianity which can be confirmed by what we still do possess (Clement, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, PolyCarp, Ireneaus). Eusebius draws a very clear picture of a persecuted, hierarchical, Apostolically successive Church. (Remember he's writing in about 320!). Some of his Chapters are entitled: -"The Work of the Apostles from the Choice of Matthias to the Deaths of Paul and Peter" - "The Distribution and Writing of the Apostles and Their Successors" -"Enemies Within the Church" -"The Succession of Bishops, Their Writings and Martyrdoms" -"The Settlement of the Easter Festival" And numerous summations of many of the early fathers writings, to name but a few.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

(Continued)

Most people don't know of the extensive documentation supporting Catholic Tradition in the first three centuries, others ignore it because it's extremely inconvenient to their religious/spiritual outlook.

For those seeking an open (and open-minded) survey of what truly exists out there and the documentation of what was truly going on, and not seeking confirmation in a limited or narrow view, I would recommend any book by Christopher Dawson, as modern scholastic classical surveys, which may allow one to form a more complete picture of the West and the Catholic Church's place in it.

Would also recommend "The Faith of the Early Fathers" in three volumes by Jurgens for a "brief" survey of Post-Apostolic, Pre-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.

For the full treatment, I would recommend "Patrology" in four volumes by Quasten. Either of these works of patristics will easily confirm what I have stated above and expound upon in excruciating detail. They are extremely well crossed-referenced.

So while I might accept the fact that your prof's proclamation was benign, and not necessarily ignorant, there is more to the story that was not obviously relayed to the class so that they might be fully informed that there is nothing in Catholic thought or Tradition that is not backed-up somewhere in germinated form and precedent in the immediate post-Apostolic period and built upon in the first three centuries. The source documentation is weighty, and should be presented to have the whole story. Had I been teaching the class, you would have a better understanding of what actually happened, not what I personally thought about it distilled down into a sound bite.

purplesage: "I think his intent is two fold: one, to discern the institutionalization of the Church (into its several forms) from the spiritual nature of the Church as defined in the New Testament"

I don't see Scripture as actually supporting a purely "spiritual" nature being assigned to the Church. For the sake of brevity, proclamations exist from the mouth of Christ Himself in the establishment of a Church, with authority given to men to legislate (bind and loose), forgive or retain sins, that His followers were to listen to the Church, and that men were to tend His sheep and feed His lambs.

Anyway, nice discussion, I ask your forgiveness for any of my lapses in charity. I am, after all, not a saint.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Anti-secularman:

"Lepanto, As a matter of fact I don't. Traditionally speaking of course."

You're not allowed to refer to "Tradition." I tire of reminding you that you are a Protestant. But it is good to see you finally and properly obeying scripture's dictate that you are to "hold fast to tradition." You are becoming more Catholic each day. Well done.

"I don't want to burden you with any scripture, you'd just have to take it to a priest for interpretation."

That would work out well for you, since I'd probably be forced to expose the fellaciousness of your scripture passages and that how nowhere in the early fathers do they intepret a given scripture passage they way you do; AND that it would take 1500 years to plumb and mine scripture to make it say things that were more advantageous to the Authorities of State.

Oh, and you wouldn't be burdening me with any scripture as I would know you, having established yourself as your own Pope, would have the associated credibility! :)

Bill Chapman 8 years, 1 month ago

I was brought up in the Christian faith and even baptised. I have attended most verisons of the Christian faith, and can honestly say the ONLY thing that impresses me about the Christian faith is the fact that they DON'T incourage suicide bombers.

It does seem to incourage car bombs(the IRA), adults having sex with minors (the Cathlic priests), and the semi-forced conversion of orphaned children intrusted to their care (all those wonderful christian missionaries in Africa).

Crossfire 8 years, 1 month ago

The true church needs to clean up it's own house before they accuse others not being true. 660 million dollars... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/us/15abuse.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

paladin 8 years, 1 month ago

The Roman Catholic Church is archaic, irrelevant, hypocritical, out of touch and unconcerned with practical human needs, spiritual, physical, social, political. It does much more harm than good, perpetuating delusion and repressing the human spirit and reinforcing false hope. It is as detached and ineffective as royalty. Its always been this way, but it is more apparent now because it has no teeth. It feeds and lives on fear and guilt. It has no living message of hope or promise. To all intents and purposes, it is dead and needs to be buried along with other relics of the past. Move on and assert your freedom.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Paladin,

I agree with everything you've stated and it makes complete sense!...

If, of course, you insert "Modern Secular State" in place of "Roman Catholic Church." Then you've actually made a stupendiously rational comment, save one item: "no teeth."

As we all know, the coercive nature and instruments of the modern state, as well as its precedents of usage, make the Spanish Inquisition, Crusades, and excommunications look like theme park rides and traffic citations by comparison.

gr 8 years, 1 month ago

Here we have camper saying, "Most of us of go to church and really don't listen to what the priest or pope might say."

And then we have Lepanto saying, "Mass attendance is about 75% of what it was" "innovating with the Mass thinking it some sort of improv opportunity to entertain;" "I am truly sorry that the laity today expects so little and sets such low standards for their prelates."

So, when forming an opinion of "Catholics", keep in mind there are the "campers" and there are the "Lepantos", and then there are the popes. There is a wide range of people. People who haven't a clue and just go to socialize and they'd fit in at most any other church. Then you have people who feel the church is falling apart, and think something needs to be done to draw people back to standards (Even if not Biblical, good intent is there). And this condition exists in most churches. It is a modernization and dilution down of the church with the members being clueless of what the Bible says or what being a Christian means.

And then you have a smaller, select group, of a more sinister nature operating at the top and in the background (for the most part).

So, when one starts out with "Catholics are...", or "Catholics believe...", it would be misleading and really doesn't reflect reality.

Kam_Fong_as_Chin_Ho 8 years, 1 month ago

Anonymous user

antisecularman (Anonymous) says:

My dear friends. Let me take the high road in this little spat, we don't want to focus on who accepts who, or who has excommunicated who. I want to extend the olive branch to all Catholics. I, as a Protestant in good standing with our Lord and Savior, and on good authority (His Word) and having been ordained in accordance with scripture (His Word), want to include all of you as members of the body of believers. (except liberal Jesuits, Albigensians, Gnostics, Mormons, Shirley McClain, and Jehovah's witnesses)

This Dispensation is good from 12 midnight tonight until rescinded or withdrawn by the undersigned. No need to respond. (ipso facto)

Signed and Sealed The Deacon ============= Wow. A little self-righteous, aren't we? If the rest of you congregation also behaves like Pharisees, I want no association with your church. "Lord, thank you for making me so righteous and humble...unlike the rest of these sinners on the message board!" lol

Kam_Fong_as_Chin_Ho 8 years, 1 month ago

Chin Ho, I viewed antisecularman's comments as sarcastic and funny. Perhaps you missed the sarcasm. ================ I hope that's the case. Sometimes it's tough to tell when it comes to haughty fundamentalists. If he was being sarcastic, I stand corrected and apologize.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Kam Fong,

Anti-Secularman's comments was sarcasm at its thickest. If you read above he and I bantered about in a little harmless fun. His comments were directed at me (a Catholic) and I took no offense. It's what we do. It's ecumenism in action at the rubber meets the road level. I don't see how anyone could be offended, unless one was looking to be offended.

Anti-Secularman is a pleasant break from the mind-numbing pooh slung by those who hate all things religious (in general) and Catholic (in particular).

Anti-Secularman cracks me up!

You should lighten up!

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Gr,

"And then we have Lepanto saying,

"Mass attendance is about 75% of what it was" "innovating with the Mass thinking it some sort of improv opportunity to entertain;" "I am truly sorry that the laity today expects so little and sets such low standards for their prelates."

So, when forming an opinion of "Catholics", keep in mind there are the "campers" and there are the "Lepantos", and then there are the popes."

I fail to see your point Gr, except that it comes through rather clear from a number of your posts, that you believe the Catholic Church unbiblical and disapprove of me. There is no "Lepanto" position that I am aware of that is not clearly articulated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church or Papal Encyclical. Because you disapprove of said documents in no way diminishes their value as common sources of information between I and another Catholic.

So when you seek to draw an equivalence of "opinions" between me who actually articulates a position using any variation of scripture, patristics, history, Catechetical teaching, reason or general observations of current events, with someone "feeling" their way through an argument, I take issue with it, not to mention, I fail to understand how you draw your conclusions.

Please explain.

gr 8 years, 1 month ago

"that you believe the Catholic Church unbiblical and disapprove of me."

Only from what you said before that the Catholic Church trumps the Bible. And I pointed out the poor logic of using the Bible to prove the church trumps it. Saying I "disapprove" of you is incorrect. I may "disapprove" of your above logic. Other than that, I was saying you have great morals and are concerned about your church while the majority thinks it's a social event.

I would think most Catholics disagree with you as illustrated by camper - and as you implied. So, I would not think, "common sources of information between I and another Catholic" would apply to you and camper - at least as far as they are concerned.

And I doubt you really understand what the top people are doing/manipulating any more than one understands what the president or the ones who control him are doing.

I'm just saying there is a large range out there when it comes to Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, etc. From your objection to my comments, do you suggest from what the pope says, one should determine reflects upon ALL Catholics?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Gr,

"Only from what you said before that the Catholic Church trumps the Bible. And I pointed out the poor logic of using the Bible to prove the church trumps it. Saying I "disapprove" of you is incorrect."

I fail to see how that is poor logic. You are assuming in your accusation that they (Church/Scripture) are mutually exclusive of one another or that I have stated such. While I will contend that Church is above Scripture, I do not contend that they are mutually exclusive of one another. That would be unscriptural. So I fail to see your accusation of using poor logic.

"I may "disapprove" of your above logic."

Please see above.

"Other than that, I was saying you have great morals and are concerned about your church while the majority thinks it's a social event."

While I'm not so sure my morals are so great, I appreciate that you can acknowledge my concern. That, I most certainly am. My concern extends to the entire breadth of Christ's fractured and divided Body of believers, as only a powerful Church will resist the primal force of Islamicist expansion and the civilization and human dignity destroying force of secularism.

I don't think that the majority see it as a social event, so much as that many are so utterly indifferent and ignorant of their Church's teachings. There simply is no excuse for this, as their is no mystery as to what the Catholic Church teaches, being that She actually issues a Catechism of some 900 pages to summarize the Faith of Catholics.

Most fail to read it and end up making fools of themselves by proclaiming things (or opinions) that simply are not Catholic. These same lack any notion of obedience, and lack the fortitude to either move on or inform themselves out of ignorance.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

(Continued)

Gr,

"I would think most Catholics disagree with you as illustrated by camper - and as you implied. So, I would not think, "common sources of information between I and another Catholic" would apply to you and camper - at least as far as they are concerned."

Their agreement is irrelevant. The Catechism is the summation of Catholic magesterial teaching whether they acknowledge it or not; whether they read it or not; whether they are obedient or not. If they do not, if they aren't, then the requisite credence is given to their opinions on things. They are want for knowledge and anti-Catholics will put much more stock in these opinions than informed Catholics. These may call themselves Catholic, but they are "Catholic" in name only. They may very well give the Church a bad name, but that does not diminish the "commonality" or the binding nature of the Catechism in any way. An analogy would run along the lines of the many Republicans today who claim that party, but spend like Great Society Democrats and attempt to lay claim to issues that were once liberal mainstays.

"And I doubt you really understand what the top people are doing/manipulating any more than one understands what the president or the ones who control him are doing."

And the converse of that is neither do you. But I fail to see how that would be relevant.

"I'm just saying there is a large range out there when it comes to Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, etc. From your objection to my comments, do you suggest from what the pope says, one should determine reflects upon ALL Catholics?"

If I understand your point correctly, the short answer is yes; but not every casual statement. If a Pope is against armed intervention in Iraq, he is giving his infomed moral opinion. There is nothing binding in such a declaration, especially for Catholic soldiers serving in a nation at war, as Just War theory has been a contentious issue since Augustine (about 1600) years and is not a matter of "faith." The Catechism leaves quite an open landscape for the prosecution of war.

But if he teaches that "all life is sacred" and that "abortion is intrinsically evil" (as Paul the VI did in Humane Vitae in 1970 and Pope John Paul II in numerous encyclicals) or that liberalization of the Latin Mass using the 1962 Missal of John XXIII is in effect (as Pope Benedict the XVI did in his Motu Propio) then, Catholics are bound to it, as it is a matter of faith.

That many Catholics fail to acknowledge any of this, or that they fail to take the time to inform themselves, or even that they are willfully disobedient in no way whatsoever diminishes the Catholic validity of such proclamations.

gr 8 years, 1 month ago

"While I will contend that Church is above Scripture, I do not contend that they are mutually exclusive of one another. That would be unscriptural. So I fail to see your accusation of using poor logic."

Well that statement right there seems contradictory. I suppose technically the statement is correct in saying they are not mutually exclusive - you are saying one is above and totally encompasses the other.

Your previous statement: "But the Bible does say listen to the Church in Matthew 18:17 and that the Church (not the Bible) "is the pillar and foundation of truth." (1 Tim 3:15)."

saying NOT the Bible, but the church is the pillar and foundation of truth, while I don't know about the "mutually exclusive" phrase, sure sounds to me that you are saying the Bible has nothing to do with anything other than to state itself is not truth.

And THAT is the faulty logic. You know, the "I'm lying to you" skit.

gr 8 years, 1 month ago

" "And I doubt you really understand what the top people are doing/manipulating any more than one understands what the president or the ones who control him are doing."

And the converse of that is neither do you. But I fail to see how that would be relevant. " Au Contraire. If the Catechism is made up outside of the Bible by top leaders with some agenda, then it has ALL the relevance. For the opposite of your analogy, for all the members of the Democratic spending party thinking and touting all their mumbo jumbo for the peace and equality of society, blah, blah, blah, when it is found out the leaders are just interested in padding their pockets or other conflicts of interest, their "list" of "promises" sound rather empty.

The Catholic church, I would hope, is a little different, but it looks very bad when statements are made that the Bible is NOT the pillar and foundation of truth, but the church. Look throughout history. Any time you have a small clique claiming themselves to be the ones in control and above anything else, does it ever follow the teachings of God? Of course Hitler "claimed" he was, as probably did many dictators. Now, I'm sure many here would claim the same of the Bible. However, I believe there are some things a little different with it which takes more than a little time to outline.

But, when a group of people set themselves up as higher than the Bible, it's just looking for problems. It's very easy to claim descent from ancient people and therefore are in charge. You seem to have a dislike for Islam. I may be wrong, but aren't they the ones claiming to be from descent of the "promised" child of Abraham? And it's been said the ones in charge now don't even follow their writings for they have set themselves up above their writings.

"common sources of information between I and another Catholic" "Their agreement is irrelevant. " At least no TRUE Catholic.

"If I understand your point correctly, the short answer is yes; " Does the pope's arrogance reflect upon ALL Catholics? or was his statement a casual statement? However, "says other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches" (which I know you tried to smooth over the media statement with other references) sounds a lot like, not a TRUE Catholic. So it comes down to, does it reflect upon the nominal Catholics? Which, was my original point in the matter of stating a wide range and not to judge them all based upon what a few say.

You do have a good point in that these nominal Catholics should be familiar with the teachings of their church. If they don't like what the church teaches, don't agree with it, don't believe it, they should move on. Can the same thing be said of "Christians" in general?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 1 month ago

Max1,

Your confusion is understandable. Comprehension of humor requires intelligence.

Oh, and you're doing a masterful job of reciprocating with a high level of humor. That whole "darkager," "holyman" and "Toxic Nazi" thing is making my sides split. Quit it! I can't breathe!

You know Max, you could have just remained silent, passed on by, and let's us all only think you a fool as opposed to having opened your piehole and removing any shred of doubt.

Have a great day!

anonymoustruth 7 years, 3 months ago

As a Catholic priest, I feel so shamed about this kind of one true church comments by Pope and another Cardinal. If any human community says they are the only truth carrier, that is absolute arrogance and narrow-mindedness and ingorance. It seems that this claim is triggered by underlying motivations to protect their own comfortable status.

Lepanto1571 7 years, 3 months ago

Anonymoustruth: "As a Catholic priest, I feel so shamed about this kind of one true church comments by Pope and another Cardinal. If any human community says they are the only truth carrier, that is absolute arrogance and narrow-mindedness and ingorance."Then you are a lost soul. Yet, I'm having a difficult time accepting the fact that you really are a priest.Pardon me "father," but who in the hell do you think you are to declare such things? By what authority in Heaven or on this earth do you make such statements? And why, in the name of all things Holy, are you a priest? Obedience must have been a lecture you missed in seminary. Perhaps you imbibed too deeply the Kool-Aid of the "spirit of V II" and actually believe that the faith killing revolution is still even a remote possibility. Sorry if you aren't up on current events and didn't get the word, but the little experiment in accomodation is mercifully in its death spasm. Perhaps, "father," you want everyone to "just get along." All I can say to that, is grow up! Go on a spiritual retreat, watch old Fulton J. Sheen videos, watch Father John Corapi and find a backbone, seek a spiritual advisor who is actually Catholic, seek out priests who are strong in their faith, re-form yourself in the image of the Master you are sworn to serve, and then serve Him. What a conundrum you leave me!: Cleave to the Barque of Peter or follow some parish priest in Jerkwater USA awash in the despair of his lost faith, not to mention poor grammar? Tough choice! Not really.You're no priest. Any priest worth his salt, even if he believed such things, would keep his mouth shut, bear his burden in quiet dignity and better spend his energy in contemplative prayer, rather than making a sniveling ass of himself on some chat board. If you truly are a priest, then I praise the mercy of God in heaven to not be counted among your number and ask our Lord to grant those that need it, the grace to endure you.You want to snivel and show everyone how hip, cool and assimilated you are, snubbing your nose at YOUR father, go right ahead, but you better get ready for a rough ride here.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.